Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: freeus who wrote (19047)	2/29/2000 5:44:00 PM
From: mauser96	Read Replies (1) of 54805

Freeus, I listened to the entire testimony, and to the the Q&A session. It was my impression that when he said "long term interest rates will at some point be high enough" he was talking mainly about the corporate bond market . Remember the Fed has little if any direct control over anything but short term rates on government issues. If I'm correct in my understanding of this, he is saying the Fed will at most only act to reinforce a trend if it is already taking place in private markets. I don't know why he says that stock market asset values can't continue to increase at a rate higher than the increase in household income, unless it's because household income is the biggest source of money used to buy those assets. But this seems a gross over simplification to me. There are lots of other sources of money (corporations, foreigners, etc)and the definition of household income is seriously open to question. Economists are analyze their data, but the data is in many cases very flawed. Remember how a few years ago most of them were saying that productivity wasn't up because their data didn't show it? Now they all agree it's up. The obvious thing here is that they don't know how to measure productivity. I know mine is at least doubled by computers, the WWW, and SI, but how do you measure this? He also said that the Fed doesn't know why federal tax revenues are up so much, so he doesn't want the government to make big tax cuts or public expenditures until they are sure. Does he have so much hubris that he is 100% sure that he understands why the markets are up so much? I doubt it. One thing he does know is that markets don't like downside surprises, so I think he will have a very cautious and gradualist policy. Considering his libertarian background, I think it likely that he has respect for markets as a price setting mechanism.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next